The Problems Of Moral Evil : The Problem Of Moral Evil

Free will comes with both the bad and the good, but it is up to each person to do bad or do good. Personal evil exists everywhere from every relationship and to every activity; it can be corrupted and distorted (Ford 70). Evil exists even in our friendships, marriages and families. From the relationships people have and the things that they do, comes with intentions. These intentions can be whole-heartedly good such as love or strictly evil such as betrayal.

The book To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee is often associated with a various number of themes such as racism, social inequality, the importance of family values, and much more. But one of the more hidden messages of the book centers around the idea that there is a coexistence of good and evil. This theme is really brought to life the more the reader is able to understand the book. Through sub themes such as coming of age, perspective, and intense characterization of many important characters the idea of good and evil is really brought to light.

One of the oldest dilemmas in philosophy is also one of the greatest threats to Christian theology. The problem of evil simultaneously perplexes the world’s greatest minds and yet remains palpably close to the hearts of the most common people. If God is good, then why is there evil? The following essay describes the problem of evil in relation to God, examines Christian responses to the problem, and concludes the existence of God and the existence of evil are fully compatible.

The Psychology of Good and Evil in contrast to Ferguson Unrest and Race in America

Evil can be categorized into two forms, moral evil and natural evil. Moral evil is brought about by bad choices that stem from our free will. Natural evil is bad things that happen to people, whether they deserve them or not. The problem with evil is,

Compatibilism, also known as soft determinism, is the position or view that causal determinism is true, but we still act as free, morally responsible agents. In the absence of external constraints, our actions are caused by our desires. W.T Stace, wanted to prove that the hard determinist definition of “free” was incorrect. He posed that free does not mean random, but that our acts are casually determined in a particular fashion. There must be a deterministic or causal connection between our will and our actions. This allows us to take responsibility for our actions, including credit for the good and blame for the bad.

In Richard Swinburne’s Natural Evil, he argues that the free will defense accounts for the existence of evil. Following Swinburne’s example, I will argue that the Problem of Evil does not give us good reason to believe that an omnipotent, benevolent deity does not exist. To do so, I will first summarize Epicurus’ original question of the problem of evil. Then, I will defend my claim by proposing the free will defense. Furthermore, I will discuss how the concepts of benevolence and omnipotence are inconsistent with the definition of God according to the free will defense. Lastly, I will address and respond to a possible objection to my argument.

Evil is something that exists in many forms. From big evils like Hitler’s Holocaust and slavery, to small evils like getting a papercut and getting stuck in the rain (perhaps to some this might be a big evil), evil is basically anything that is not good. For theologians, evil poses several problems, most notably when it comes to the existence of God.

The two solutions to what we call the problem of evil are: the free will defense and the Supralapsarian theodicy. The free will defense argues that evil and God are not incompatible because God didn’t create evil. According to this defense, human beings create evil with the free will that God given them. Since free will must be totally free, God cannot guide us to do what is good only since he wants his creatures to have complete freedom over their lives and what they do. So, by proving that God and evil can coexist logically, the free will defense is a path out of the problem of evil.

with some evil in it. Better? Why would God being so good and concerned about

In contrast, the innocence of God was tested after Lieble’s story of the abduction of his three sons, and the Nazi presenting an ultimatum allowing Lieble to save only one. Consequently in that depressing story we never found out the decision Liebele made, but one of them countered this story with the privilege God gave to man known as “free will.” Although a perplexing, but equivalently effective argument was corroborated in Lieble’s defense; “Where was Lieble’s free will when he had to choose between his three sons, when the officer said he can only keep one.” Furthermore, that counter was reversed with the explanation of evil in the world existing as a result of the misuse of the privileges awarded to all from God. Specifically, one claimed “God gave man free will as a privilege, and its not his fault that some choose to do evil with free will.” In the end, the idea that should’ve been addressed in that trial, is what we could’ve done to help each other as humans. If conflicts were resolved and discussed, such trials, and catastrophes such as the Holocaust wouldn’t have

Richard Swinburne as well as J.L Mackie discuss solutions to the problem of evil and provide explanations and alternatives to specific problems in the problem of evil. Mackie doesn’t completely argue against evil in this world but allows for God to intervene in particular evils, and not allow circumstances to get too horrid. Swinburne on the other hand explains that we need these evils in this world to appreciate the beneficial times, and if God did intervene and not allow awful consequences and natural evils then life would be too easy for us. I think that Swinburne’s argument is more compelling because with God allowing us free will we should have the choice to make our own decisions. I know that there are horrific means that stem from our free will and own choices, but I believe that it’s best that way and that gives us meaning to life, and lets us decide the type of person we want to be and not controlled by our

We serve an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God. He created us all in his likeness giving us dominion of the earth and knows our every move before we even make it. Yet in the in the midst of the Garden of Eden, evil entered into our world. Christians have come to ask how is it that the God who has created everything allow evil to enter into his creations. The answer is not to blame God for letting sin in, for it is through us as humans who were given free will to make our decisions, evil entered creation. We have come to terms that our free will has a brought evil into the world but we still have questions about this evil and our will that need to be answered. For instance why would a God who is all knowing give his creations free will, if He knew with that free will His creations would bring evil into this world, and have to provides grace and mercy for His creations who are doomed without Him. A fourth century theologian and philosopher St. Augustine of Hippo is able to explore and articulate such questions of how evil and the free will are intertwined that have perplexed Christians.

The theological problem of evil is a problem that many philosophers have tried to solve. The problem is stated as, "if one believes that god is omnipotent and wholly good, why does evil still exist?" In this writing I will discuss the solutions/propositions of John L. Mackie in his work, "Evil and Omnipotence." I will do this in order to illustrate the concept of free will for understanding or resolving the problem, and to reveal how and why Mackie arrives at his conclusions.

What is considered evil depends upon each individual’s view of morality, which constantly changes through the course of that person’s life. Roy Perrett’s “Evil and Human Nature” explains this by elaborating on the customary interpretation of moral evil. This evil, caused by an intentional bad action or harm, opposes another type of evil, natural evil, which occurs without